Unauthorized? Ball Swap

One of the things I really enjoy about playing on clay courts is how the surface itself adds dynamic variability to the competition. Over the course of a match, both the playing surface and the balls themselves may change significantly. This is the reason that the rules about the timing of ball changes in tennis matches are so precise and persnickety. It is to ensure that neither player gains an advantage from the ball rotation.

In recreational-competitive tennis, the balls are not frequently changed. When the format calls for a super-breaker in lieu of the third set, there is usually no ball change at all during the match. Typically when three full sets are played, new balls are introduced at the start of the 3rd. That was the ball change policy in place at the National Senior Women’s Clay Court Championships a couple of weeks ago.

My doubles partner ran into an interesting ball change controversy during a back-draw singles match. The courts were very wet, and the humidity level was also high. Consequently, the balls became heavier and significantly darker as the match progressed.

Her opponent asked the roving official for new balls to start the second set. When the roving official returned with the new balls, my doubles partner agreed with the replacement. A few games into the second set, she became convinced that she had been better off with the heavier damp balls. I also agree with that assessment. Heavier balls are better suited for her style of play than for her opponent.

They split sets, so new balls were once again provided as they headed into the third. That was the only official ball change scheduled for that match per the tournament policy. Curiously enough, a provision in “The Code” that also appears verbatim in the Regulations indicates conditions where that scheduled ball swap could potentially not occur.

When a tournament specifies new balls for a third set, new balls shall be used unless all players agree otherwise.

The Code Principle 43, Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2023.

It is unlikely that my doubles partner’s opponent would have agreed to forgo the second ball swap, but suggesting it was a possibility since the balls had already been changed out already in the match.

The match eventually reached 6-6 in the third. This is where something highly unusual occurred that actually prompted this post. The roving official once again provided new balls for the third set tie-break game. Additionally, this time he did not inform both players that new balls were being put into play. My doubles partner would not have agreed with the insertion had she known that it was occurring. Per the rules, she had every right to refuse new balls and certainly would have done so at that juncture.

Unfortunately, she was several points into the tie-breaker before noticing that they were using new balls. At that point, the old ones were long gone. She went on to lose the tie-break game.

After the match, she confronted the umpire over the unauthorized ball change. He claimed that the balls were replaced because one of them had become wet. There is actually a procedure in the USTA regulations that governs that situation.

Balls that become unfit for play. If a ball becomes unfit for play (for example, ball breaks or loses compression), it shall be replaced immediately. If a ball becomes wet, it may be taken out of play temporarily until it dries, or it may be replaced.

USTA Regulations III.I.2, Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2023.

If it is truly the case that one of the (already wet and clay-impacted) balls had become significantly wetter than the others, the correct procedure is to take it out of play temporarily until it dries. The third set tie-breaker should have been concluded using the remaining two balls.

However, if it had been deemed necessary to swap a single ball, there are also conditions in the Regulations for doing that.

Replacement of balls. If a ball has to be replaced during the warm-up or before the start of the third game after a ball change, the ball shall be replaced with a new ball. At all other times it shall be replaced with a ball of like wear to the remaining balls.

USTA Regulations III.I.3, Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2023.

If one of the balls warranted replacement, then the ball substituted should have also been very wet and stained with clay. Additionally, there was some debate well after the fact over how many balls were substituted and the relative conditions of the new balls. From my own observations, the balls in play at the conclusion of the tie-break game were considerably drier and more yellow than the ones being used as the match headed into the third set tie-breaker.

The extraneous ball changes were a departure from the USTA Regulations. It arguably should not have occurred. The worst part is that the deviations potentially create a perception of favoritism toward one player from the official.

This was a highly unusual situation in which the roving official may not have fully understood the USTA Regulations or how his actions would ultimately be perceived. I think this episode is an interesting case study illustrating how good intentions can have unanticipated secondary impacts. Once again, officiating is tough.

---

1. Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2023
2. USTA Officiating Techniques and Procedures, USTA Publication, undated.